ZZ 6spd gearbox swap into a Paseo

[Donald]

The following comes from a post I started in the Tercel/Paseo forum back in 2008.
The topic was the ZZ engine/gearbox as a practical swap for a Tercel.

Well it is confirmed that the ZZ 6spd gearbox bolts up to the 5E/3E engine block and fits in the Paseo engine bay with no problem. The Corolla engine bay is a few inches wider so it will definitely fit in there.
Are the "E" engine block and "A" engine block gearbox bolt pattern the same?

Read the text below then check out the link.

{ The 2zz trans bolts up to the 5efe so the trans should stay in the right spot, no mods except the top of the trans where the mount plate is.
It sounds like to me that the engine would fit just fine.
some one did this to an older xb with no cutting and it carries the 1nzfe witch is a damn close to drop in for the tercel.

Read this then think about it http://www.toyotaownersclub.com/foru...owtopic=114165
This guy swapped a 6 speed into his Paseo. }


The thread is here:
http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/sh...11#post3328211

[rdyzz]

zz engines use a c series tranny so does paseo/tercel and of course ae92,101,111

[SuLLiVaN88]

there is a 2zzfe trans from a celica on ebay right now. completely rebuilt for 1000. it would be so nice to have that extra gear in the corolla

[Donald]

Originally Posted by rdyzz

zz engines use a c series tranny so does paseo/tercel and of course ae92,101,111

I didn't know that the bell housings and axle shafts were the same.
Makes me think that a AE92/ZZ swap might not be that difficult.

[SuperRA]

Ok, I've been pondering this for a while now. I once considered a 6 spd tranny for the 4AGE in place of my C52. My main reason for doing so would be to have a low RPM highway gear to save gas etc. on the freeway. However if I have my facts and math correct, it appears that the 6 speed may not lower RPMs on the freeway and thus save no gas. In fact it appears to me that the 6 speeds are to provide a lower set of ratios in 1 and 2 to improve acceleration.

Here is my math:
C52 (GTS)
5th = 0.815 & Final = 4.058
Overall ratio in 5th gear = 0.815 x 4.058 = 3.30727

C60
6th = 0.725 & Final = 4.529
Overall ratio in 6th gear = 0.725 x 4.529 = 3.283525

Are my gear ratios correct? I've searched the internet and that's what I've found and all that I have to rely on. If so, it doesn't appear freeway fuel consumption will be improved. Unless a difference of .024 makes a big difference in RPM? Do the math for first and second and it shows that for the 6 spd will most likely accelerate better.

What do you think?

[Donald]

Originally Posted by SuperRA

Ok, I've been pondering this for a while now. I once considered a 6 spd tranny for the 4AGE in place of my C52. My main reason for doing so would be to have a low RPM highway gear to save gas etc. on the freeway. However if I have my facts and math correct, it appears that the 6 speed may not lower RPMs on the freeway and thus save no gas. In fact it appears to me that the 6 speeds are to provide a lower set of ratios in 1 and 2 to improve acceleration.

Here is my math:
C52 (GTS)
5th = 0.815 & Final = 4.058
Overall ratio in 5th gear = 0.815 x 4.058 = 3.30727

C60
6th = 0.725 & Final = 4.529
Overall ratio in 6th gear = 0.725 x 4.529 = 3.283525

Are my gear ratios correct? I've searched the internet and that's what I've found and all that I have to rely on. If so, it doesn't appear freeway fuel consumption will be improved. Unless a difference of .024 makes a big difference in RPM? Do the math for first and second and it shows that for the 6 spd will most likely accelerate better.

What do you think?

Did you mean C160?

I don't remember the figures but the C160 drops the RPM a few hundred.
All the lower ratios are the same as the 5spd, but the 6th is taller.
It has a lower differential ratio so all the lower gears are a bit shorter, but 6th makes up the difference and then some.


Remember, the final figure in your calculation is the number of times the engine turns for each turn of the wheel. So the engine turns about 3.3 times for each turn of the 5spd, and turns 3.28times for each turn of the wheel with the 6spd. That might not seem like much till you devide that into 3500 RPM


5 spd at 3500 RPM/3.30 = 1060 wheel RPM

6 spd at 3500 RPM/3.28 = 1067 wheel RPM - This wheel is turning faster so the car is going faster at 3500 RPM.

The 6 spd gives both better accelleration and better top speed (or lower top gear engine RPM) but it also means you need to be shifting more, which I only see as a negative, when you are in traffic.

There is a guy on WheelsJamaica.com who put a C160 on his 4A-GE 16V and he says it has made that engine perform amazingly.

[SuperRA]

Originally Posted by Donald

Did you mean C160?

I don't remember the figures but the C160 drops the RPM a few hundred.
All the lower ratios are the same as the 5spd, but the 6th is taller.
It has a lower differential ratio so all the lower gears are a bit shorter, but 6th makes up the difference and then some.

C60 or 160, it appears they have the same gear ratios.

The ratios that I've seen for the 6spd are all different (except 1st gear) than the C52 (GTS)

Originally Posted by Donald

Remember, the final figure in your calculation is the number of times the engine turns for each turn of the wheel. So the engine turns about 3.3 times for each turn of the 5spd, and turns 3.28times for each turn of the wheel with the 6spd. That might not seem like much till you devide that into 3500 RPM


5 spd at 3500 RPM/3.30 = 1060 wheel RPM

6 spd at 3500 RPM/3.28 = 1067 wheel RPM - This wheel is turning faster so the car is going faster at 3500 RPM.

Ok, so in my case, my tire is 22.7" dia. Circumference = 22.7 x 3.14 = 71.3" An extra 7 RPM means the 6spd will go an extra 499" or 41.5ft every minute... Not much a gain IMO.

Let's see if I can get this math right.
WREV = Wheel Revolution
EREV = Engine Revolution

For the C52
At 65MPH: 65Miles/1Hr x 1Hr/60Min x 5280ft/1Mile x 12in/1ft x 1WREV/71.3in x 3.30EREV/1WREV = 3177RPM

For the 6Spd
At 65MPH: 65Miles/1Hr x 1Hr/60Min x 5280ft/1Mile x 12in/1ft x 1WREV/71.3in x 3.28EREV/1WREV = 3157RPM

According to the math the 0.02 difference in ratio gives me a drop of 20RPM at 65MPH. I dunno, if its all correct, it just doesn't seem to give much an advantage. Please school me if I got the math wrong..??

Originally Posted by Donald

The 6 spd gives both better accelleration and better top speed (or lower top gear engine RPM) but it also means you need to be shifting more, which I only see as a negative, when you are in traffic.

There is a guy on WheelsJamaica.com who put a C160 on his 4A-GE 16V and he says it has made that engine perform amazingly.

I don't disagree with this except IMO the top speed is negligible. But if my main reason for swapping in the 6spd was fuel economy, I'd just be adding weight to my car. I dunno, If I'm wrong, I'm totally fine with that, I'd just like to know why. (Plus if I'm wrong that means I can look for a 6Spd to swap in)

[rdyzz]

Originally Posted by Donald

I didn't know that the bell housings and axle shafts were the same.
Makes me think that a AE92/ZZ swap might not be that difficult.

i also wonder if the axles are a little drifferent. atlest on the transmission side anyways. as far as clutch goes, i always thought you can use same flywheel, pressure plate as engine with the exception of the clutch disk being the one that has to match with the tranny.

i wonder if celica axles would work, i remember awhile back some of the sw20 guys where not able to find helical trd lsd's for the s54 anymore and looked in mr-s spyder diffs which had crazy close measurements.

[Donald]

Originally Posted by SuperRA

According to the math the 0.02 difference in ratio gives me a drop of 20RPM at 65MPH. I dunno, if its all correct, it just doesn't seem to give much an advantage. Please school me if I got the math wrong..??


I don't disagree with this except IMO the top speed is negligible. But if my main reason for swapping in the 6spd was fuel economy, I'd just be adding weight to my car. I dunno, If I'm wrong, I'm totally fine with that, I'd just like to know why. (Plus if I'm wrong that means I can look for a 6Spd to swap in)

I haven't checked your math, but if you are correct, it doesn't seem worth the effort.

I do know that going from the 4A-GE to the 7A-FE, and the matching gearboxes, my RPM dropped about 500 at 70 MPH. The difference is the differential ratios, the 7A gearbox is 3.722 and the 4A-GE box is 4.311.
That 500 RPM difference made cruising at 75 a lot less frenetic and much more comfortable.

Comparing that to the difference in the 6spd, it really doesn't seem to be much, like you said.

Originally Posted by rdyzz

i also wonder if the axles are a little drifferent.

this guy that swapped the 6spd into his Paseo didn't make any mention about the axles, so I am guessing that he was able to use his originals.

I also believe that the Corolla / Tercel / Paseo all have the same spline ends at both ends of the axles.

[SuperRA]

Originally Posted by Donald

I haven't checked your math, but if you are correct, it doesn't seem worth the effort.

I do know that going from the 4A-GE to the 7A-FE, and the matching gearboxes, my RPM dropped about 500 at 70 MPH. The difference is the differential ratios, the 7A gearbox is 3.722 and the 4A-GE box is 4.311.
That 500 RPM difference made cruising at 75 a lot less frenetic and much more comfortable.

For this case assuming you have a similar tire diameter:
At 70MPH: 70Miles/1Hr x 1Hr/60Min x 5280ft/1Mile x 12in/1ft x 1WREV/71.3in x 3.03EREV/1WREV = 3145RPM

Your previous 4.311 C52 would have been:
At 70MPH: 70Miles/1Hr x 1Hr/60Min x 5280ft/1Mile x 12in/1ft x 1WREV/71.3in x 3.30EREV/1WREV = 3421RPM

A difference of 376RPM. I'd definitely say that's a noticeable improvement.

This is something else I pondered, how would the standard corolla gearing perform behind a 4AGE. It seems the only difference is the diff ratio is more freeway friendly and to make up for that in acceleration, first gear is lower (numerically higher). This makes the jump from 1st to 2nd pretty large tho. Seems like it wouldn't feel right with the powerband of the 4AGE.

Sorry to hijack this thread, I was just hoping to get answer to these questions I've been wondering for a long time.

[Donald]

Originally Posted by SuperRA

This is something else I pondered, how would the standard corolla gearing perform behind a 4AGE. It seems the only difference is the diff ratio is more freeway friendly and to make up for that in acceleration, first gear is lower (numerically higher). This makes the jump from 1st to 2nd pretty large tho. Seems like it wouldn't feel right with the powerband of the 4AGE.

Sorry to hijack this thread, I was just hoping to get answer to these questions I've been wondering for a long time.

No hijack, just good discussion. That's how we learn and make better decisions.

I think with the weak low end torque of the 4A-GE, it would probably feel like a dog with the 4A-FE gearbox. Since the GE needs to spin real high to get any torque, it would probably require a bit of clutch slippage to get a good launch, and you would have to hold your shifts later in order to keep up with traffic.

Ofcourse I am just gusessing.
The proof of the pudding is in the tasteing, so we would need to hear from someone who has tried it.

[SuperRA]

Originally Posted by Donald

No hijack, just good discussion. That's how we learn and make better decisions.

I think with the weak low end torque of the 4A-GE, it would probably feel like a dog with the 4A-FE gearbox. Since the GE needs to spin real high to get any torque, it would probably require a bit of clutch slippage to get a good launch, and you would have to hold your shifts later in order to keep up with traffic.

Ofcourse I am just gusessing.
The proof of the pudding is in the tasteing, so we would need to hear from someone who has tried it.

It appears that 1st gear of the standard corolla gearing would launch a tad bit quicker as it's overall ratio in 1st is 13.19 where the GTS gearing is 12.85. I just fear the rest of the gears being out of the powerband or something like that. I considered getting one for my sedan's 4AGE for highway efficiency, but I really like the GTS gears 1st to 4th. I think Toyota could have made 5th slightly taller, as its a very small jump from 4th. Oh well, I'll just suffer the fuel efficiency. I found it to be not that bad, it's hovers around 30mpg mixed hwy/city for the GTS.

Now, as for the ZZ swap info, this is sounding real interesting. I've always wanted to have one of those engines in some car. Now knowing it may fit a lot easier than I thought opens all sorts of cans of worms...

[Donald]

Originally Posted by SuperRA

I think Toyota could have made 5th slightly taller, as its a very small jump from 4th. Oh well, I'll just suffer the fuel efficiency. I found it to be not that bad, it's hovers around 30mpg mixed hwy/city for the GTS.

Now, as for the ZZ swap info, this is sounding real interesting. I've always wanted to have one of those engines in some car. Now knowing it may fit a lot easier than I thought opens all sorts of cans of worms...

I agree that 5th have been taller, but back then 25MPG was considered good. Toyota was making one-size-fit-all cars for the entire world, most of which didn't have express ways, so a taller 5th might not have made sence.

The difference in fuel efficiency is there, but really negligible, I think.

My milage increased by just shy of 2 mpg after swapping in the 7A-FE engine and gearbox, but then, I am a lead-foot.

If I knew for sure that the ZZ engine was a reasonably easy swap, I would have gone with that instead of the 4A-GZE that I am puting into my FX-16. Primarily because it is a newer engine and parts availability.

[TRDKAMURI99]

Didn't know it can be done. Hmmm making me think....